Podcast

Exclusive Arnie Gundersen Interview: The Dangers of Fukushima Are Worse and Longer-Lived Than We Think

Friday, June 3, 2011, 3:54 PM

"I have said it's worse than Chernobyl, and I’ll stand by that. There was an enormous amount of radiation given out in the first two to three weeks of the event. And add the wind blowing inland. It could very well have brought the nation of Japan to its knees. I mean, there is so much contamination that luckily wound up in the Pacific Ocean as compared to across the nation of Japan it could have cut Japan in half. But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo, and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave. We are well beyond where any science has ever gone at that point, and nuclear fuel lying on the ground and getting hot is not a condition that anyone has ever analyzed."

So cautions Arnie Gundersen, widely regarded to be the best nuclear analyst covering Japan's Fukushima disaster. The situation on the ground at the crippled reactors remains precarious and at a minimum it will be years before it can be hoped to be truly contained. In the near term, the reactors remain particularly vulnerable to sizable aftershocks, which still have decent probability of occurring. On top of this is a growing threat of 'hot particle' contamination risk to more populated areas as weather patterns shift with the typhoon season and groundwater seepage.

In Part 1 of this interview, Chris and Arnie recap the damage wrought to Fukushima's reactors by the tsunami, the steps TEPCO is taking to address it, and the biggest operational risks that remain at this time. In Part 2, they dive into the health risks still posed by the situation there and what individuals should do (including those on the US West Coast) if it worsens.

Click the play button below to listen to Part 1 of Chris' interview with Arnie Gundersen (runtime 36m:31s):

You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.

Download/Play the Podcast
Report a Problem Playing the Podcast

Or start reading the transcript below:

Chris Martenson: Welcome to another PeakProsperity.com podcast. I am your host, Chris Martenson, and today I have the privilege of speaking with Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates. In my eyes, a living legend in the field of nuclear engineering. He has over thirty-nine years of nuclear industry experience and oversight and is a frequent expert witness on nuclear safety matters to the US Federal Government and private industry.

Since the initial days of the disaster at Fukushima, Arnie and his staff at Fairewinds have produced, hands down, the most thorough, measured, accurate analysis of the unfolding developments there. A feat made all the more challenging by the frequent lack of information from TEPCO and the Japanese government and media. Now today, Arnie and I will talk about the latest state of the situation at Fukushima, which remains wholly unresolved and it's quite troubling – we should keep our eyes on it. In addition, we are going to discuss what the important factors are for you to know, as well as what pragmatic preparations those of us who live in or near nuclear installations or countries that have them should really be doing. So Arnie, welcome to the show, it's a pleasure to have you.

Arnie Gundersen: Thank you very much, and I note that a lot of your readers have come to our site and I appreciate it.

Chris Martenson: We have some great readers and they are interested in knowing the truth, as best they can find it, and we have a way of being at our site, which is that we really like to keep our facts very separated from our opinions. Something that I really admire that you do, as well.

Arnie Gundersen: Well, thanks.

Chris Martenson: Let’s just briefly review – if we could just synopsize – I know you can do this better than anybody. What happened at Fukushima – what happened? I really would like to take the opportunity to talk about this specifically, like where we are with each one of the reactors. So first of all, this disaster – how did it happen? Was it just bad engineering, was it really bad luck with the tsunami? How did this even initiate – something we were told again and again – something that couldn’t happen seems to have happened?

Arnie Gundersen: Well, the little bit of physics here is that even when a reactor shuts down, it continues to churn out heat. Now, only five percent of the original amount of heat, but when you are cranking out millions of horsepower of heat, five percent is still a lot. So you have to keep a nuclear reactor cool after it shuts down. Now, what happened at Fukushima was it went into what is called a “station blackout,” and people plan for that. That means there is no power to anything except for batteries. And batteries can’t turn the massive motors that are required to cool the nuclear reactor.

So the plan is in a station blackout is that somehow or another you get power back in four or five hours. That didn’t happen at Fukushima because the tidal wave, the tsunami, was so great that it overwhelmed their diesels and it overwhelmed something called “service water 2” But in any event, they couldn’t get any power to the big pumps.

Now, was it foreseeable? They were prepared for a seven-meter tsunami, about twenty-two feet. The tsunami that hit was something in excess of ten and quite likely fifteen meters, so somewhere between thirty-five and forty-five feet. They were warned that the tsunami that they were designed against was too low. They were warned for at least ten years, and I am sure that there were people back before that. So would they have been prepared for one this big? I don’t know, but certainly, they were unprepared for even a tsunami of lesser magnitude.

Chris Martenson: So the tsunami came along and just swamped the systems, and I heard that there were some other design elements there too, such as potentially the generators were in an unsafe spot or that some of their electrical substations all happened to be in the basement, so they got taken out all at once. Now, here’s what I heard – the initial reports when they came out said, “Oh, nothing to fear, we all went into SCRAM,” which is some emergency shutdown and they said everything is SCRAMed and I knew that we were in trouble in less than twenty-four hours, they talked about how they were pumping seawater in. Which I assume, by the time you are pumping seawater you have a pretty clear indication from the outside that there is something really quite wrong with this story, is that true?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes. Seawater, and as anybody who has ever had a boat on the ocean would know, saltwater and stainless steel do not get along very well. Saltwater and stainless steel at five hundred degrees don’t get along very well at all. You are right, they had some single points of vulnerability – the hole in the armor and the diesels were one of them. But even if the diesels were up high, they would have been in trouble because of those service water pumps I talked about. And they got wiped out and those pumps are the pumps that cool the diesels. So even if the diesels were runnable, cooling water that runs through the diesels would have been taken out by the tsunami anyway. So it's a false argument to blame the diesels.

Chris Martenson: Okay, so take us through. Reactor number one, it was revealed I think about a week ago now that they finally came to the revelation that I think some of us had come to independently, that there had been something more than a partial meltdown, maybe even a complete meltdown. What is your assessment of reactor one and where is it right now?

Arnie Gundersen: When you see hydrogen explosions, that means that the outside of the fuel has exceeded 2,200 degrees and the inside is well over 3,500 degrees. The fuel gets brittle, it burns, and then it plops to the bottom of the nuclear reactor in a molten blob like lava. It was pretty clear to a lot of people, including apparently to the NRC, but they weren’t telling people back in March, that that had occurred in reactor one. There was essentially a blob of lava on the bottom of the nuclear reactor. So I have to separate this – a nuclear reactor - and that is inside of a containment. So there is still one more barrier here. But the problem is that the reactor had boiled dry and they were using fire pumps connected to the ocean to pump saltwater into the reactor. Now, if this thing were individual tubes, the water could get around the uranium and completely cool it. But when it's a blob at the bottom of the reactor, it can only get to the top surface and that would cause it to begin to meltdown. Now, on these boiling water reactors, there are about seventy holes in the bottom of the reactor where the control rods come in and I suspect that those holes were essentially the weak link that caused this molten mass. Now it's 5,000 degrees at the center, even though the outside may be touching water, the inside of this molten mass is 5,000 degrees. It melts through and lies on the bottom of the containment.

That’s where we are today. We have no reactor essentially, just a big pressure cooker. The molten uranium is on the bottom of the containment. It spreads out at that point, because the floor is flat. And I don’t think it's going to melt its way through the concrete floor. It may gradually over time; but the damage is already done because the containment has cracks in it and it's pretty clear that it is leaking. So you put water in the top. And the plan had never been to put water in the top and let it run out the bottom. That is not the preferred way of cooling a nuclear reactor in an accident. But you are putting water in the top and it's running out the bottom and it's going out through cracks in the containment, after touching directly uranium and plutonium and cesium and strontium and is carrying all those radioactive isotopes out as liquids and gases into the environment.

Chris Martenson: So this melting that happened, is this just a function of the decay heat at this point in time? We’re not speculating that there has been any sort of re-criticality or any other what we might call a nuclear reaction – this is just decay heat from the isotopes that are in there from prior nuclear activity – those are just decaying and giving off that heat. That’s sufficient to get to 5,000 degrees?

Arnie Gundersen: Yes, once the uranium melts into a blob at these low enrichments, four and five percent, it can’t make a new criticality. If criticality is occurring on the site - and there might be, because there is still iodine 131, which is a good indication - it is not coming from the Unit 1 core and it's not coming from the Unit 2 core, because those are both blobs at the bottom of the containment.

Chris Martenson: All right, so we have these blobs, they’ve somehow escaped the primary reactor pressure vessel, which is that big steel thing and now they are on the relatively flat floor of the containment – they concrete piece – and you say Unit 2 is roughly the same story as Unit 1 – where’s Unit 3 in this story?

Arnie Gundersen: Unit 3 may not have melted through and that means that some of the fuel certainly is lying on the bottom, but it may not have melted through and some of the fuel may still look like fuel, although it is certainly brittle. And it's possible that when the fuel is in that configuration that you can get a re-criticality. It's also possible in any of the fuel pools, one, two, three, and four pools, that you could get a criticality, as well. So there’s been frequent enough high iodine indications to lead me to believe that either one of the four fuel pools or the Unit 3 reactor is in fact, every once in a while starting itself up and then it gets to a point where it gets so hot that it shuts itself down and it cycles. It breathes, if you will.

To read the rest of the transcript to Part 1, click here.

Click here to access Part 2 of this interview.


Arnie Gundersen is an energy advisor with 39 years of nuclear power engineering experience. A former nuclear industry senior vice president, he earned his Bachelor's and Master's Degrees in nuclear engineering, holds a nuclear safety patent, and was a licensed reactor operator. During his nuclear industry career, Arnie managed and coordinated projects at 70-nuclear power plants around the country. He currently speaks on television, radio, and at public meetings on the need for a new paradigm in energy production. An independent nuclear engineering and safety expert, Arnie provides testimony on nuclear operations, reliability, safety, and radiation issues to the NRC, Congressional and State Legislatures, and Government Agencies and Officials throughout the US, Canada, and internationally. 


Our series of podcast interviews with notable minds includes:

Related content

81 Comments

PastTense's picture
PastTense
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2010
Posts: 47
I have a very negative view

I have a very negative view that Part 2 (Protecting Yourself if the situation worsens) is only available to Premium Members.

While I think there is a consensus here that people who play in the stock market can easily afford to spend $30/month for investment advice and thus have no problem with Chris charging $30 for investment advice in a Premium section, I wonder how many other people here support Chris charging for life and death health information.

Poet's picture
Poet
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Posts: 1844
Yeah, Well...

PastTense

To a certain extent, I can sympathize with your view. But at the same time, just because I'm one of the people who contributes to this site as well as takes from it, I can't say I "deserve" free stuff. We already get a lot of free stuff on this site and Dr. Martenson deserves to make some money to support the workers that make their living and feed their families from the income generated. It may also be that Dr. Martenson had to compensate Arnie Gunderson. We just don't know.

Still, yeah I guess there's a discomfort factor whenever we're reminded that we are traveling steerage and sometimes the gates are locked not just to prevent you from dining at the captain's table (which, while delicious, isn't necessary), but also to prevent you from reaching sick bay (assuming Part II is that critical). Though the previous release of enrolled member information on Fukushima (Alert: Nuclear (and Economic) Meltdown In Progress) led me to think at least the lifeboats would be accessible - but I may be wrong.

On the other hand, let's consider what we can do. The Executive Summary of Part II states:

  • Identifying the health dangers from radiation & contamination
  • Steps those living in Japan and the US West Coast should be taking today
  • Precautions to take with food
  • The implications of radioactive seawater
  • Urgent steps to take in a worst-case scenario if reactor 4 collapses

While we don't know exactly describe what Part II is about, one thing mentioned by Gunderson early in Part 1 is, "But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave." I think that gives you a clue.

But personally, if I were in Japan, I'd be moving to the southernmost island already - and that's if I couldn't leave for another country much farther away. As for what to do if you're much farther away already (United States, Europe), I'd say, thank your lucky stars. And remember that there's a ton of research you can do for free on Google and in watching updates from Gunderson on other sites. It's possible he's just rehashing what's already known or said, and adding his own opinion.

Maybe we can do our own educated guessing in the comments here. And perhaps someone who is an enrolled member can at least reveal if we are on the wrong track and should quickly take money out of our families' grocery budget for a one-time membership uptake?

Poet

PastTense wrote:

I have a very negative view that Part 2 (Protecting Yourself if the situation worsens) is only available to Premium Members.

While I think there is a consensus here that people who play in the stock market can easily afford to spend $30/month for investment advice and thus have no problem with Chris charging $30 for investment advice in a Premium section, I wonder how many other people here support Chris charging for life and death health information.

gpb79's picture
gpb79
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 24 2009
Posts: 2
Public Service

Like a lot of people, I have benefited enormously from Chris' largesse. His Crash Course was an important part of my early education and I have also benefited from subsequent writings of Chris'. 

However, as a resident of Tokyo and a keen follower of things related to Fukushima, I have to say that on this particular occasion, I believe the second part of the interview should be in the public domain as it is directly related to people's health in Japan and the west coast of America.

I understand that Chris needs to make a living and having been a paying member of the site at one time, I have contributed to that living, but part two of this interview should be available to the people it directly affects, such as people like myself who may suffer real consequences as a result of the Fukushima disaster.

HowardBeale's picture
HowardBeale
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 4 2010
Posts: 10
True Colors

Just one more sight where you can't trust the motives of the owner... What a great disappointment.

homestead's picture
homestead
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 16 2008
Posts: 54
public health

Odd that the Fukushima disaster has all but disappeared from the mainstream media for weeks on end despite occasional tidbits that it's ongoing and worse than Chernobyl.  Odd that there's no public discussion on major news channels.  It just disappeared under the radar.  Not to worry.  The produce from US western states is evidently unaffected.  California continues to be safe in its role as salad basket to the nation.  The residents of Tokyo have nothing to worry about either.   Nor do the fishermen.  Not now.  Not in the future.  It's such a given that there's nothing to worry about, that we won't even discuss it in MSM.  Too much New News to fill the electronic airways with, so -- as some of the blogger commentators say as they push the sarcasm button -- let's just move on folks, there's nothing here to see.

But maybe there is something more to see.  If there's information that possibly impacts people's health, and if that information might be useful in protecting their health, it would seem ethical to divulge it so that individuals could evaluate it and decide for themselves what to do.  In the case of Part 2 of the interview with Gundersen, I wonder if it contains information that's potentionally pertinent to public health.  If it does, I'd like to see it.  Please Chris, release it to us.

BTW, I live in an area not far from Three Mile Island.  Our neighborhood has been riddled in the past 10 years with cases of cancer and the neighbors talk about "the accident" and wonder if it has anything to do with all the cases of cancer. Nobody knows.  But we wonder.

Ken C's picture
Ken C
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 13 2009
Posts: 753
HowardBeale wrote: Just one

HowardBeale wrote:

Just one more sight where you can't trust the motives of the owner... What a great disappointment.

What a ridiculous comment. No one owes you anything - get over it.

Adam Taggart's picture
Adam Taggart
Status: Peak Prosperity Co-founder (Online)
Joined: May 26 2009
Posts: 1876
Trust

Wow. We have received a lot of heated feedback today regarding Part 2 to this interview being accessible only to our enrolled members.

Given that the topic has to do with safeguarding health, the emotion is understandable.

If the podcast contained critical breaking news about imminent threat to life, it would have been publicly available from the start. 

In his comment above, Poet gave an accurate reminder that our enrollment model is what enables this site to bring so much valuable free content to all. In order to do that, other content must be reserved for paying subscribers.

But given the extreme concerns about the perceived urgency of the information here, we've made Part 2 publicly available. (And we'll credit those accounts that enrolled in the past few hours since this post went live)

We make decisions every week about what content to reserve for our enrolled members. It's important to us that our readers trust our judgment in doing this - in this case, that we aren't holding back critical public health information that can't be found elsewhere in the public domain. In order to strengthen that trust, we're making Part 2 available so everyone can see that's not the case. 

ann.s's picture
ann.s
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 23 2011
Posts: 11
Nothing wrong with charging for pt 2.

I guess I'll be the odd-(wo)man out here and disagree.

I understand your frustration.  However, Chris has given away volumes of free content.  Important content.  And as I understand, he did then and continues to do because he feels it's the right thing to do. 

Knowing that, I assume that for Chris, pt 2 of this interview doesn't fall into that category.  It is titled "Protecting Yourself, if the Situation Worsens."

I trust Chris and Adam to know right from wrong.  So I'm pretty sure they are doing the right thing here.  

So rather than jumping to conclusions, I vote for having faith in Chris and giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

Just my 2 cents.  Laughing

Ann

PastTense wrote:

I have a very negative view that Part 2 (Protecting Yourself if the situation worsens) is only available to Premium Members

hucklejohn's picture
hucklejohn
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2008
Posts: 281
Nothing Wrong about Charging

I am amazed about the entitlement mentality expressed by some that certain content because it is characterized as "life or death" material should be provided for "free."  This is just one small example of why America is in such dire straits.  The folks who urge that healthcare or education or some other service ought to be provided for "free" are in affect leading us down the path to tyranny.  Someone has to pay for these things.  And on top of that we should remember that -- I am guessing here -- most of the content on this site is provided at no charge.  In my view Chris has been quite generous in providing & maintaining this excellent site.  When he started this site Chris no doubt invested a substantial effort into making a go of the site financially.  Chris took a calculated risk in starting this site which has turned out to be quite successful.  It is just & proper that Chris and his team be rewarded for their efforts.    

soulsurfersteph's picture
soulsurfersteph
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 16 2010
Posts: 204
Thank you

Thanks to Chris and Adam for making this information available to everyone.

This really isn't an issue of "entitlement." First off, I feel that anyone who comments here regularly contributes and isn't being "entitled" by asking for important, life-saving content to be made available. Non-enrolled members contribute pageviews and content that gets picked up by search engines, which brings more traffic and more dollars to the website. People who aren't enrolled members may also be clicking on ads. Or donating once in a while. Or maybe they've shared the Crash Course with 10 friends. Or bought the DVD. All of that is valuable.

So we need to remember that the site, while driven primarily by enrollments, is also driven by word of mouth, DVD sales, ad revenue and more.

Thus, making content like this available for free is good business. It generates good will and positive PR.

I have no problem with there being enrolled/paid content on the site. But for something like this, offering it for free is not only generous, it's smart. It creates good will, which is a currency that is highly valuable on the web right now.

Thanks again for listening to your readers!

Gibber's picture
Gibber
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 4 2008
Posts: 35
ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
distasteful

It amazes the lack of dignity and self-respect some people have and the sense of entitlement.  To ask, demand, plead, or beg for something I didn't earn or pay for is something I just couldn't and wouldn't do.  And then to make excuses about it, to me, compounds the offense.  It's small wonder that we have the problems we have.  The saying "the way to make someone good for nothing is to give them something for nothing" has never been more true than in the present.  We're gradually evolving into a nation of moral weaklings with the character of cowbirds and the fortitude of wet tissue paper as the going gets tougher.       

hucklejohn's picture
hucklejohn
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 13 2008
Posts: 281
distasteful

Amen, ao!  You expressed the sentiment much better than I could.  Honestly people need to grow up.  No doubt difficult times are coming.  I remain thankful for the effort that Chris & his team have put into this valuable site.  

Bradford's picture
Bradford
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 23 2009
Posts: 20
distasteful?

I'll assume that Arnie Gundersen gave Chris the interview without charge...I'm sure it was given from a spirit of good will, and done in an effort to help to inform all those who are so deeply concerned. As someone who has purchased Chris' DVDs and subscribed multiple times to his premium service, I'm glad that he saw fit to do likewise in this case, and I'm also very grateful for all the other instances of his tireless generosity. Those comments about lack of dignity and self respect are what I'm finding to be the most ugly and distasteful in this thread.

SagerXX's picture
SagerXX
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 11 2009
Posts: 2120
ann.s wrote: I trust Chris

ann.s wrote:

I trust Chris and Adam to know right from wrong.  So I'm pretty sure they are doing the right thing here.  

So rather than jumping to conclusions, I vote for having faith in Chris and giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

Second that.  Anybody who has spent any significant time here, and doubts that Dr. Chris has the well-being of all of us in mind, just hasn't been paying attention.

Viva -- Sager

soulsurfersteph's picture
soulsurfersteph
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 16 2010
Posts: 204
compassion

hucklejohn wrote:

Amen, ao!  You expressed the sentiment much better than I could.  Honestly people need to grow up.  No doubt difficult times are coming.  I remain thankful for the effort that Chris & his team have put into this valuable site.  

Precisely. Difficult times *are* coming, which is why those who are fortunate enough to be able to afford a $30/month enrolled membership, which is not chump change (it adds up!), should be a bit more forgiving of site members who may be going through tougher times and simply cannot afford an enrolled membership at this time.

Those "whiners" may in fact have been previous paid members who helped get this site off the ground. They may in fact become paid members in the future.

In the meantime, asking for the sharing of life-saving information does not make them bad people.

There are many ways that the site can "profit" off of this information, whether through advertising or using it as a marketing vehicle. There is plenty of enrolled member content already - so not everything posted on the site needs to be behind a paywall. Part of getting people to pay is having quality FREE content to generate customer loyalty first.

Is the intention to chase off the site "free loaders" with these harsh comments? Will that help the site in the long run?

Just my two cents.

soulsurfersteph's picture
soulsurfersteph
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 16 2010
Posts: 204
Moving right along - Arnie Gunderson is the best!

I feel we don't need to beat a dead horse over paid/free content anymore (though I suppose people could debate it in the forums). So to quote Kermit and Fozzie...MOVING RIGHT ALONG...

I just wanted to say that I am a huge fan of Arnie Gunderson and feel he has done a wonderful service keeping people informed about Fukushima in a calm, rational manner. I am not done listening to audio 1 yet but I think Chris is doing a great job with the interview. It is very informative.

I am concerned that Arnie says there is a slight chance of another steam explosion. He pegged it at about 1 in 100 chance...that still seems low to me. Listening on for more info on how that might affect us as well as Japan.

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Compassion

soulsurfersteph wrote:

hucklejohn wrote:

Amen, ao!  You expressed the sentiment much better than I could.  Honestly people need to grow up.  No doubt difficult times are coming.  I remain thankful for the effort that Chris & his team have put into this valuable site.  

Precisely. Difficult times *are* coming, which is why those who are fortunate enough to be able to afford a $30/month enrolled membership, which is not chump change (it adds up!), should be a bit more forgiving of site members who may be going through tougher times and simply cannot afford an enrolled membership at this time.

Those "whiners" may in fact have been previous paid members who helped get this site off the ground. They may in fact become paid members in the future.

In the meantime, asking for the sharing of life-saving information does not make them bad people.

There are many ways that the site can "profit" off of this information, whether through advertising or using it as a marketing vehicle. There is plenty of enrolled member content already - so not everything posted on the site needs to be behind a paywall. Part of getting people to pay is having quality FREE content to generate customer loyalty first.

Is the intention to chase off the site "free loaders" with these harsh comments? Will that help the site in the long run?

Just my two cents.

Steph,

I am in total agreement with you.

Regards,

~ VF ~

Travlin's picture
Travlin
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 15 2010
Posts: 1322
A matter of priorities

Chris Martenson is extremely generous in the quantity and quality of the information he gives away absolutely free.  That is a fact.  It is my opinion that he does this because he wants to warn the broadest number of people he can.  My experience tells me that with his credentials and track record he could make a lot more money by charging big bucks to a select market. 

I find it amazing, and dismaying, that some people have the gall to demand he give away everything for free, or at least the parts they want to read, and make disparaging remarks about him as well.  How do you expect him to make a living and be able to continue his work, which includes all that vital information you already get for free?  How would you get your chance to make your “contributions” if Chris didn’t make this site available?

I spent many of my young adult years on an income that was very low and sporadic.  If you have a job you can find a way to come up with a dollar a day if something is important to you.  It is simply a matter of priorities.  Enrolled membership is only $30 for a month, and you don’t have to commit to a longer term.  Buy a month when you find a particular report you really want to read.  If I couldn’t afford to do that I sure wouldn’t have the gall to demand it for free.

If you really think it is a matter of “life and death” you will find the money.  How are you going to deal with real hard times if you can’t make a hard choice now?

Travlin 

soulsurfersteph's picture
soulsurfersteph
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 16 2010
Posts: 204
compassion part 2

Travlin wrote:

If you really think it is a matter of “life and death” you will find the money.  How are you going to deal with real hard times if you can’t make a hard choice now?

Travlin 

I've had periods in my life where my bank account was overdrawn and I didn't know if I'd have money to buy food for the week. Yes, I had Internet access because I needed it for work. You don't know who might benefit from the information in part 2 - particularly, there are people in Japan who have been on this site reading these Fukushima threads trying to determine whether they need to stay or go to save the lives of their family members.

$30 may not seem like a lot to you but it can be a lot to someone else. That $30 may be the last bit of money needed to get out of Tokyo. Never mind that some people may not have the means to pay online for simple reasons of international payment issues. I've run my own little site where I've had people in places as far off as Indonesia pay me by Western Union. They could not use PayPal or a credit card. We assume so much living in America.

And once again I'll submit that the good will generated by giving away *life-saving* content such as this FAR EXCEEDS the potential loss of profit by not keeping it behind a pay wall. Chris in part generates enrollments and tremendous loyalty because he is perceived by the community as being a very caring person. Now, if you've been on the site for a while, and have signed onto the mission, and are a "Chris believer," you may feel almost personally attacked by someone getting upset over this interview being put behind a paywall. I think what Chris does is great and I don't presume ulterior motives of Chris.

But look at it from the perspective of the new user: They don't know Chris. They just see enrollment buttons. And with something as serious as Fukushima, it's perceived as an ethics thing. If I had the opportunity to save lives by sharing information, wouldn't I share it freely? That's how people think. So if a new community member comes by and sees Chris charging for things like this, that newbie may not have the benefit of years of exposure to Chris. It simply comes off bad from a PR angle.

You have to think about the PR aspect of this, and PR-wise, it's simply better to give these life-saving things away for free while keeping financial wealth management info behind the paywall. Let's hope we only have one Fukushima in the next few years, so this issue should not come up too much other than that. No-one is suggesting Chris give away everything for free. But stuff that could save someone's life or help them protect their children's health? Saving lives should always come before profit - that lesson unheeded is why we have Fukushima in the first place.

PS Still hoping we can move along now and discuss the actual audio :-)

Vanityfox451's picture
Vanityfox451
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Dec 28 2008
Posts: 1636
Ken C's picture
Ken C
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 13 2009
Posts: 753
soulsurfersteph

soulsurfersteph wrote:

Travlin wrote:

If you really think it is a matter of “life and death” you will find the money.  How are you going to deal with real hard times if you can’t make a hard choice now?

Travlin 

I've had periods in my life where my bank account was overdrawn and I didn't know if I'd have money to buy food for the week.

If that is the case that someone is in such difficult circumstances that they can't buy food then what do you expect that they would be able to do with any information about Fukushima?

I have zero sympathy for people that have time to "surf the net" but no time to hustle a buck to buy some food.

butterflywoman's picture
butterflywoman
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 2 2010
Posts: 46
neither having a great skill

neither having a great skill of demanding give me give  me give me, nor having  the $30 bucks is going to be much help as we move further into this changing world. in both cases it seems to me, people are wanting to be spoon fed....for free or for pay.

i don't read this site to tell me what to do, i read it to add to the work i've done for myself to adapt to the changes that are upon us now. i spend most of my time online finding out for myself the things i want to know

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
Bradford wrote: I'll assume

Bradford wrote:

I'll assume that Arnie Gundersen gave Chris the interview without charge...I'm sure it was given from a spirit of good will, and done in an effort to help to inform all those who are so deeply concerned. As someone who has purchased Chris' DVDs and subscribed multiple times to his premium service, I'm glad that he saw fit to do likewise in this case, and I'm also very grateful for all the other instances of his tireless generosity. Those comments about lack of dignity and self respect are what I'm finding to be the most ugly and distasteful in this thread.

I have no problem with Chris doing what he did  It's his site and his call and he's demonstrated his generosity (and forebearance) again and again.  What I do have a problem with is the entitlement mentality and especially, the badmouthing.  And yes, the truth is indeed ugly.  And as someone else expressed and I totally agree with, what is most concerning is that some of these individuals aren't even aware enough to be embarassed by their actions and understand that it is this very atttitude that has contributed, in part, to our present dilemma.  

HowardBeale's picture
HowardBeale
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Mar 4 2010
Posts: 10
HowardBeale wrote:   Just
HowardBeale wrote:

Just one more sight where you can't trust the motives of the owner... What a great disappointment.

Kem C wrote:  

What a ridiculous comment. No one owes you anything - get over it.

It has nothing to do with a sense of entitlement. It has everything to do with the fact that Arnie wouldn't even consider charging for such a thing. I'm surprised that he participated knowing that it would be a profit mechanism; lowers my esteem of him if that is, indeed, the case. As a physicist, I find it absolutely unconscionable to charge for such information.

Poet's picture
Poet
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Posts: 1844
I Agree With Bradford And Soulsurfersteph

I Agree with Bradford and Soulsurfersteph.

Yeah. as everyone here agrees, Chris can do anything he wants. But honestly, if he didn't share that information, I would think less of him. And I would be perfectly entitled to that opinion and I would act accordingly. I probably would be much less enthusiastic about sharing the Crash Course and his site and his message as much as I have on the Internet, if I thought Chris was trying to profit off information that could be saving lives right now.

gpb79 wrote:

Like a lot of people, I have benefited enormously from Chris' largesse. His Crash Course was an important part of my early education and I have also benefited from subsequent writings of Chris'.

However, as a resident of Tokyo and a keen follower of things related to Fukushima, I have to say that on this particular occasion, I believe the second part of the interview should be in the public domain as it is directly related to people's health in Japan and the west coast of America.

I understand that Chris needs to make a living and having been a paying member of the site at one time, I have contributed to that living, but part two of this interview should be available to the people it directly affects, such as people like myself who may suffer real consequences as a result of the Fukushima disaster.

When it comes to the the consequences of radiation sickness and cancer, maybe people are being paranoid, but their immediate fears are real. Being perceived to be taking advantage of that fear may earn immediate money, but would also weaken perceptions of reputation and trust.

Take me, for example. I am not an enrolled member. But anyone can see I have 700+ posts here and no one can deny that I contribute. - news articles, opinions, smaller insights, etc. What you may not see are the hundreds more other messages and e-mails, as well as comments that I post across discussion boards, Facebook, and in the comments section of mainstream news articles. Personally, I have converted several of my friends and acquaintances, and some have bought the Crash Course book and DVD. That's money right there. I myself came here because someone posted something in passing somewhere about the Crash Course (which might be why I don't remember how I got here).

This is the site I visit first from work, during my breaks and at lunch, as well when I catch a few moments between feeding and diapering my babies at all hours of the night. I wouldn't be spending all this time contributing, or working to spread news of the site, the message, and the man, if I perceived the site, the message, or the man to have a lesser reputation.

If I thought less of Chris, I might instead just link to the Youtube postings of the Crash Course, and say, "Watch the course. It's really important. But don't bother joining the site because all he wants is more money for premium content." That's a much more diluted and lukewarm message compared to "Watch the Crash Course. Afterwards, join the site and consider becoming a paid member for the market tips and insight!"

Now you might say, "Well this site can do without you, Poet," and you'd be right. But there are a lot of others like me here. Collectively, we have a major posiive monetary impact on this site's bottom line. The collective contribution may not be immediately and financially measurable, but it is not at all inconsiderable.

The message is, you're entitled to do whatever you want, but be wary of turning people off or of turning them negative.

  • Your dismissive comments to one another will not help if your goal is to make this a better, more inclusive community.
  • Your disparaging comments will just remind some here of your inner nature every time they see your name.
  • Your distasteful comments will remind them not to bother being helpful to you next time you raise a question or mention a concern they might have an answer or solution or suggestion to.
  • Your denigrating comments will turn away, rather than attract, the new people we are all trying to get to read this article or watch the Crash Course, or visit this site, who may potentially be paying customers.

Do it often enough, or make people feel like this site isn't really into helping everyone and spreading an inclusive message, and people will start turning the positive word of mouth into negative word of mouth.

Good will is not as measurable, so it's perceived value may be lower. But indeed, good will is very real, and only those who have lost it can realize how difficult it is to regain it and the benefits it provides.

Adam wrote:

Given that the topic has to do with safeguarding health, the emotion is understandable.

If the podcast contained critical breaking news about imminent threat to life, it would have been publicly available from the start. 

In his comment above, Poet gave an accurate reminder that our enrollment model is what enables this site to bring so much valuable free content to all. In order to do that, other content must be reserved for paying subscribers.

But given the extreme concerns about the perceived urgency of the information here, we've made Part 2 publicly available. (And we'll credit those accounts that enrolled in the past few hours since this post went live)

We make decisions every week about what content to reserve for our enrolled members. It's important to us that our readers trust our judgment in doing this - in this case, that we aren't holding back critical public health information that can't be found elsewhere in the public domain. In order to strengthen that trust, we're making Part 2 available so everyone can see that's not the case. 

I am glad that Chris and Adam quickly made Part 2 of this interview with Arnie Gundersen available, as they did with Part 2 of the Alert on Fukushima. There are potentially life-saving direct actions people in Tokyo like Gbp79 can take right now, and potentially life-saving actions we on the West Coast of the continental U.S. can take, and things we all can do to lessen the risks to our health. Thank you!

Doing this only further increases the good will people have towards Dr. Martenson and this site and community, and will only further increase people's efforts at promoting this site. And that's just awesome for everyone's bottom line.

Poet

Bradford wrote:

As someone who has purchased Chris' DVDs and subscribed multiple times to his premium service, I'm glad that he saw fit to do likewise in this case, and I'm also very grateful for all the other instances of his tireless generosity. Those comments about lack of dignity and self respect are what I'm finding to be the most ugly and distasteful in this thread.

soulsurfersteph wrote:

Precisely. Difficult times *are* coming, which is why those who are fortunate enough to be able to afford a $30/month enrolled membership, which is not chump change (it adds up!), should be a bit more forgiving of site members who may be going through tougher times and simply cannot afford an enrolled membership at this time.

Those "whiners" may in fact have been previous paid members who helped get this site off the ground. They may in fact become paid members in the future.

In the meantime, asking for the sharing of life-saving information does not make them bad people.

JAG's picture
JAG
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 26 2008
Posts: 2490
Donations

My hat is off for Dr. M and staff. Thank you for making the complete interview free to everyone, and I very much enjoyed the interview.

Because I can appreciate how much work goes into researching, writing, and podcasting about this important subject, I just made a $5.00 donation to the site via paypal. 

Donate Here.

Perhaps CM.com should integrate a micro-donation feature into the business plan for certain types of content.

Thanks again...Jeff

gregroberts's picture
gregroberts
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Oct 6 2008
Posts: 1024
Thank you Chris for this

Thank you Chris for this site and all the information you have provided at no cost, it is of great help in planning for the future which you don't find in the MSM.

Arnie Gundersen: Yes. Seawater and as anybody who has ever had a boat on the ocean would know, saltwater and stainless steel do not get along very well.

I think he meant steel and iron, stainless steel is almost impervious to corrosion from seawater although I'm not familiar with this subject at high tempertures.

maceves's picture
maceves
Status: Gold Member (Offline)
Joined: Aug 23 2010
Posts: 279
no great threat

OK

I heard the second part.

I feel very sorry for the Japanese,  and I feel very sorry for all of us that love to eat tuna, but I don't feel that any truly essential information was being withheld from us.  Now we know in advance that in the future the time will come when the tuna will be contaminated,.  You can change the filter in your air conditioner if you are worried about contamination.    Damp mop the floors if you are a lot closer than I am.  It's all very sad.

I admire the fact that Chris has stayed on top of this.  He has known from the the first news blurbs that there was more to this story than the press was covering for us.

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
JAG wrote: My hat is off for

JAG wrote:

My hat is off for Dr. M and staff. Thank you for making the complete interview free to everyone, and I very much enjoyed the interview.

Because I can appreciate how much work goes into researching, writing, and podcasting about this important subject, I just made a $5.00 donation to the site via paypal. 

Donate Here.

Perhaps CM.com should integrate a micro-donation feature into the business plan for certain types of content.

Thanks again...Jeff

Good point Jeff.  Even if some can't afford a full enrollment, every little bit helps.  Are they willing to put their money where their mouth or is it all talk?

I'm always amazed by folks who complain about not having enough money and how hard it is for them yet they'll spend valuable time posting for hours and hours when they could be using that time for more productive purposes to benefit themselves, their families, and others.  And they'll find every excuse in the book to rationalize their behavior, never getting out of the trap they've created for themselves.   

Poet's picture
Poet
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Posts: 1844
Feels Good, Doesn't It?

ao wrote:

I'm always amazed by folks who complain about not having enough money and how hard it is for them yet they'll spend valuable time posting for hours and hours when they could be using that time for more productive purposes to benefit themselves, their families, and others.  And they'll find every excuse in the book to rationalize their behavior, never getting out of the trap they've created for themselves.   

Yeah, I remember you telling me about that, Ao. In private message even. You don't need to know the full details of my situation and I don't feel a need to satisfy you by giving out more. But you have no right to judge me or anyone else here.

Now please excuse me while I step away again to "benefit" my twin babies while my wife is taking a well-deserved nap.

Poet

pinecarr's picture
pinecarr
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 13 2008
Posts: 1602
Thanks Chris and Arnie for a

Thanks Chris and Arnie for a great interview, and giving us so much better insight into what is really going on at Fukashima, and the potential -and as Arnie states in some cases unknowable- consequences.

Kudos also to Chris and Adam for making the 2nd part of the interview available to all.  It was a generous thing to do.

I'm also glad that they made that choice because Chris doesn't deserve to have people thinking that his primary motive is profit.  Anyone who has been around this site for a long time knows that not only did Chris give the Crash Course away for free, but that various people who posted back then, when he was creating the course, criticized him for NOT charging!!  Their position was that the Crash Course was a huge analytical endeavor, and that a man deserves to make a living from his work.  But Chris refused.  He refused to charge for the video course because the message was so important, and (I think) because he didn't want people to think that it was about money. 

Anyone who has followed Chris's site closely for a while also knows that he only just recently even started breaking even and making a profit!   Instead, he and his family have been living off their life savings so he could communicate the message he feels so passionate about communicating, motivated by concern over the the well-being of his childrens' future, as well as our own.

So I am glad that Chris and Adam made the call to make Part  2 of the interview free to the public. Chris is a  person of high integrity, and I am glad to have any confusion on that point resolved.

 

gallantfarms's picture
gallantfarms
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 18 2009
Posts: 20
This Vitamin May Reduce Damage From Radiation

From a free article on the health website mercola.com:  Nutrients to protect the body from radiation damage, including Vitamin D, Potassium Iodide, Spirulina, Sweet Whey and others.

"As understanding of Vitamin D increases, it is becoming apparent that its most active form, Vitamin D3 (calcitriol), may offer protection against a variety of radiation-induced damages. Vitamin D’s protective action is carried by a wide variety of mechanisms, including cell cycle regulation and proliferation, cellular differentiation and communication, and programmed cell death (apoptosis).

A paper on the subject argued that vitamin D should be considered among the prime nonpharmacological agents that offer protection against low radiation damage and radiation-induced cancer -- or even the primary agent."

According to the paper in the International Journal of Low Radiation:

"... [O]ur understanding of how vitamin D mediates biological responses has entered a new era ... In view of the evidence that has been presented here, it would appear that vitamin D by its preventive/ameliorating actions should be given serious consideration as a protective agent against sublethal radiation injury, and in particular that induced by low radiation".

Link to full article:

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/03/this-vitamin-can-radically-reduce-damage-from-radioactivity-from-fukushima.aspx

gpb79's picture
gpb79
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 24 2009
Posts: 2
Fukushima part 2

For what it is worth, I am happy that the Chris took the comments seriously and made the interview public.

While it is not much, in response, since I  was one of the people who made a comment/complaint about it, I donated $5 via paypal

as a sign of appreciation.

Many thanks for making part 2 public.

Mike in Tokyo Rogers's picture
Mike in Tokyo Rogers
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 4 2011
Posts: 1
What a bunch of sensationalist BS!

Anyone who would believe this shiite and actually pay for this tripe is a fool and deserves to get cheated. Just reading this part makes me realize that this Gunderson doesn't have a clue as to what he is talking about: 

"I have said it's worse than Chernobyl and I’ll stand by that. There was an enormous amount of radiation given out in the first two to three weeks of the event. And add the wind blowing in-land. It could very well have brought the nation of Japan to its knees. I mean, there is so much contamination that luckily wound up in the Pacific Ocean as compared to across the nation of Japan - it could have cut Japan in half. But now the winds have turned, so they are heading to the south toward Tokyo and now my concern and my advice to friends that if there is a severe aftershock and the Unit 4 building collapses, leave. We are well beyond where any science has ever gone at that point and nuclear fuel lying on the ground and getting hot is not a condition that anyone has ever analyzed."

What horsesh*t. No. It is June. The prevailing winds in Japan from March to December always blow from the west or south. It's been that way for several million years, I don't know why Gunderson thinks it's going to change anytime soon. That's why in this season we have monsoons this season in Japan. Any 3rd grader will tell you that monsoons come up from the Phillipines to Okinawa to Kansai to Tokyo then head up and peter out. We just had a monsoon this week. Did it blow upwind? Astounding.

From December to March, winter, prevailing winds blow from north east. Even then, that will blow any fallout over the Pacific Ocean.

Martenson must be desperate for money when he is passing off this tabloid sensationalist crap for journalistic integrity. Any Google search will verify the information I just posted. Martenson loses massive credibility with this article then asking for money to read the rest of this nonsense.

Here are facts and not conjecture - for free! http://bit.ly/m8wQWe

phecksel's picture
phecksel
Status: Silver Member (Offline)
Joined: May 24 2010
Posts: 156
Mike in Tokyo Rogers

Mike in Tokyo Rogers wrote:

What horsesh*t. No. It is June. The prevailing winds in Japan from March to December always blow from the west or south. It's been that way for several million years, I don't know why Gunderson thinks it's going to change anytime soon. That's why in this season we have monsoons this season in Japan. Any 3rd grader will tell you that monsoons come up from the Phillipines to Okinawa to Kansai to Tokyo then head up and peter out. We just had a monsoon this week. Did it blow upwind? Astounding.

Always?  I would hope you check with historical wind activity before making statements containing "always".  Low pressure cells rotate counter clockwise (diff in southern hemisphere?)  An off shore low pressure cell pass just off shore will bring some of those dangerous northern SURFACE winds to bear on the island.

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2491
Mike in Tokyo Rogers

Thanks for the belly laugh Mikey. Why don't we cherry pick a minor point and avoid discussion about the situation on-site, the type and amount of radioactive material spread where and how far, the immediate and long term recovery prognosis and framing the situation in terms of a possible worst case scenario and instead focus on some arbitrary meteorological nonsense like which way the wind blows.

You talk about credibility yet you feature a story on your site about Chernobyl and proudly display a photoshopped picture of a woman with three ass cheeks????? Well played Judas.

MarkM's picture
MarkM
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 22 2008
Posts: 755
Mike in Tokyo Rogers

Mike in Tokyo Rogers wrote:

From December to March, winter, prevailing winds blow from north east. Even then, that will blow any fallout over the Pacific Ocean.

I am still trying yo figure how a wind from the Northeast at Fukushima will blow something out over the Pacific.

homestead's picture
homestead
Status: Bronze Member (Offline)
Joined: Apr 16 2008
Posts: 54
appreciation for this site

First of all, thanks Chris and crew for releasing the information in Part 2.  I found it to be helpful in rounding out a bit more of the picture that seems to be so full of missing information and misinformation.  I've gone to Gundersen's website http://fairewinds.com a few times but didn't catch several of the details that were in the interview posted here on CM.  I also listened to the videos of epidemiologist Steve Wing's presentations in 2009 re Three Mile Island, and it was quite surprising and disturbing to me to see the color coded map of the radiation plumes and subsequent cancer cases within 10 miles of TMI from 1976-1985 (18 minutes into the video).  The question that it raises is who, if anyone, has tracked cancer cases there over a longer timeframe and why stop at 10 miles?  Couldn't a case be made for a wider area, especially lands that are downwind most of the time?  And why were only rare types of cancers tracked?  As I mentioned earlier, I live in the area and the people here wonder if they're not experiencing a higher rate of cancer than normal.  The situation in Japan is that one we can, at least in small part, identify with.  We know what it's like to worry about nuclear contamination.  It's silent, it's insidious and it's often actively concealed by those who have the power and incentive to do so.

Secondly, from a couple of the members posting above, I learned something about this website that I didn't know.  You can support the effort with small donations if you aren't in a position to be at the 'enrolled member' level of giving.  You can do it online or via regular mail.  I don't know how I missed hearing that before but now I'll be sending in a little money.  Here's the link if anyone else feels likewise:  http://www.peakprosperity.com/help-the-cause

Thanks Chris for all your efforts and dedication.  You're appreciated.

Poet's picture
Poet
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Posts: 1844
Millions Fewer Girls Born Due to Nuclear Radiation?

(Crossposted here and in the Daily Digest.)

I'm a little puzzled at the explanation of damage to X chromosomes, because...

As we all know, girls are XX, boys are XY. X-linked genetic issues tend to hit males harder because males only have one X chromosome. Women have two, so if there's a problem with an X chromosome, the other one is usually going to help make up for it in women.

As an example, color blindness overwhelmingly affects more males than females. Though women can be carriers of the color-blind-linked X, the other X makes up for it. (Interestingly, there are some women who have incredibly rich color vision because they have different genes for color on each X chromosome.)

That said, here is the National Geographic article:

Millions Fewer Girls Born Due to Nuclear Radiation?
"Nuclear radiation from bomb tests and power plant accidents causes slightly more boys than girls to be born, a new study suggests. While effects were seen to be regional for incidents on the ground, like Chernobyl, atmospheric blasts were found to affect birth rates on a global scale. The result: Millions fewer females have been born worldwide than would otherwise be expected, researchers estimate."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/06/110602-millions-fewer-gi...

Perhaps the radiation-linked damage is something else that affects female embryos in utero. that male embryos may have some kind of resistance to or protection from. Or, the damage could be causing female embryos to express more or make more of a certain protein than normal. Anyways, that's just conjecture at this point until scientists find out more.

The Russians have a lot to answer for.

"'The closer the country was to Chernobyl, the stronger the effect,' said Scherb, a biostatistician at the German Research Center for Environmental Health in Munich."

Watch out, Japan...

Poet

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
Poet wrote: You don't need

Poet wrote:

You don't need to know the full details of my situation and I don't feel a need to satisfy you by giving out more. But you have no right to judge me or anyone else here.

I'm not sure why you think I have any interest in knowing the full details of your situation but I have none.  Also, I can assure you that having more details is totally unrelated to any satisfaction or dissatisfaction I would have about anything.  The PM I sent you was meant to offer an observation that I thought could be of assistance.  It evidently wasn't and that's as far as any interest goes.  As far as any "right to judge", I've never claimed or expressed such a "right" nor is my judgement or lack of judgement of any consequence or significance but such as statement is often reflective of a certain level of self-judgement.  Otherwise, there'd be no need to make the statement.

Enjoy your babies while they're young.  Time passes quickly.   

Dogs_In_A_Pile's picture
Dogs_In_A_Pile
Status: Martenson Brigade Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 4 2009
Posts: 2491
Not quite accurate Poet

Poet -

My daughter was born after I had been exposed to about 110 mrem of ionizing radiation from an operating submarine nuclear power plant - accumulated over an 18 month period.

My son was born after I had been exposed to 290 mrem of ionizing radiation from exposure to Co-60 during an extended maintenance shutdown - accumulated in about 90 seconds.

I am convinced that radiation from operating plants causes more girls to be born and radiation from shutdown plants causes more boys to be born. 

Admittedly, if you make your sample group small enough you can prove anything.....Cool

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
questionable

Poet,

It'd be interesting to read the actual study.  I'm always suspicious of the summarizations of scientific studies reported in the media since the reporters usually don't have a clue.  There's a lot of crappy science nowadays, misinterpretation of data, fudged data, agendas, etc.  I've seen tons of it in my professional fields.

I'd tend to think the male/female ratio is influenced more by selective abortion than by ionizing radiation.  I recently heard a report (which I have not confirmed) that the male/female ratio in China is  now up to 120:100, largely due to selective abortion.  That is a very dangerous situation that historically is virtually always followed by war, within about a decade.  

Dogs,

I'd have to agree with you.  An individual that I know personally who was closer to a nuclear blast than anyone I know (close enough to have his helmet blown off) had one boy and one girl.  So I guess exposure to a nuclear blast causes a perfect 1:1 male:female ratio. :-) 

BTW, the individual is still alive and very healthy, active, and strong for his age (except for a bout of thyroid cancer, which is almost a given for his situation).  So possibly ionizing radiation has an invigorating effect.  I'd call it the Godzilla Effect.;-)   

Poet's picture
Poet
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Jan 21 2009
Posts: 1844
Ahahahah!

Dogs_In_A_Pile wrote:

Poet -

My daughter was born after I had been exposed to about 110 mrem of ionizing radiation from an operating submarine nuclear power plant - accumulated over an 18 month period.

My son was born after I had been exposed to 290 mrem of ionizing radiation from exposure to Co-60 during an extended maintenance shutdown - accumulated in about 90 seconds.

I am convinced that radiation from operating plants causes more girls to be born and radiation from shutdown plants causes more boys to be born. 

Admittedly, if you make your sample group small enough you can prove anything.....Cool

Well, a large sample group covering 40 countries is what they were working with. We don't know their methodology, but I felt it was of interest to share.

For all we know, it could have been boxers versus briefs. :)

Poet

tokyokate's picture
tokyokate
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 4 2011
Posts: 1
thank you Chris! great interview w/ Mr. Gundersen

and maybe I can provide a bit of perspective here.  

It is not because we feel "entitled" that we want access to this information.  I, for example, pay for 3 investment analysis sites, and now I'm thinking about subscribing to this one because Chris Martensen is alert enough to be following this in detail, when most mainstream reporters are not, and have not yet grasped the seriousness of this nuclear situation -- and that with this turn of events, we will see a huge paradigm shift in energy/ nuclear / economics.

I think maybe it's difficult for many commenters here, who are based in the West perhaps, to understand that, for millions of people who are living in Tokyo/ Japan/ Asia, this is an immediate matter of life and death. And we need to make decisions -- like, do I check out of this hotel in Hong Kong today and fly back to Tokyo, or not?   Take my situation, for example...I normally work and live in Tokyo; I was there on 3/11 when the earthquake and tsunami hit; I was there until the following Tuesday 3/15 (the highest day of radiation levels btw) when my husband and I left for, first, Singapore (2 weeks), and then Hong Kong (a month in a hotel, and now we have a temp. furnished apartment).  I have been living out of one suitcase ever since these nuclear meltdowns started.  And it is very difficult to know what to do, when TEPCO and the Japanese government have not been releasing accurate information.   Information was only released in small bits, and always in isolation -- never painting a larger picture. I have a lot of pressures to go back to Tokyo:  my job is there;  my apartment in Daikanyama; my two cats that my Japanese teacher is taking care of!  But I also am lucky in the sense that I have a global job; I have a creative team in Hong Kong, also, that reports to me, and I'm starting up a team in Korea, and one in Singapore, so I have used this time to do a lot of the travel and "cementing relationships" in different countries that I really did need to do, anyway.  And now I have sought, and received permission from my company, to stay in this temporary apartment in HK, until December.   But most people -- including my whole Japanese creative team -- and the whole ad agency I work for, comprised of both Westerners and Japanese, are still in Tokyo.   And I need to take business trips, at least, to Tokyo every six weeks or so.  So yes -- whether Tokyo is safe is extremely important to us.   And there has been so little information about it!   So of course there was a lot of emotion about Part 2.  and now I'm going to go listen to it, myself!  ;- )  cheers and thanks again Chris for your clarity and then taking action and actually recording the interview with Arnie Gundersen.  Finally, something to move us forward.

Curtis L. Walker's picture
Curtis L. Walker
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Jun 4 2011
Posts: 1
You Done Good

As a brand spanking new member who purchased the book today, too, I was thrilled to find the decision to make part II of the interview available to the public. For a few post I felt my blood pressure rise, then, this decision. Have cred with me. Cannot wait for the book and already shared site with my kids. Will be paying member before the weekend is done. Thanks.

One more thing...I note there is a way to publicize the book/site. Where might that info be found?

ao's picture
ao
Status: Diamond Member (Offline)
Joined: Feb 4 2009
Posts: 2220
tokyokate wrote: It is not

tokyokate wrote:

It is not because we feel "entitled" that we want access to this information.  I, for example, pay for 3 investment analysis sites, and now I'm thinking about subscribing to this one because Chris Martensen is alert enough to be following this in detail, when most mainstream reporters are not, and have not yet grasped the seriousness of this nuclear situation -- and that with this turn of events, we will see a huge paradigm shift in energy/ nuclear / economics.

Welcome to the site.  Glad you can afford 3 investment analysis sites.  Hope you can afford one more and support the cause.  Credit card = enrollment + instant information + satisfaction of knowing you're helping out.

missy's picture
missy
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: Sep 15 2009
Posts: 12
hot particles comment

Can anyone expand upon Gundersen's comment that we inhale hot particles all the time?  Have US west coast residents been inhaling significantly fewer particles than they are inhaling in Japan?  This comment seems to have alarmed many people so I'm trying to figure out how to follow up the observation (as a non-scientist, unfortunately).

guardia's picture
guardia
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 26 2009
Posts: 592
Re: Mike in Tokyo Rogers

Dupe

guardia's picture
guardia
Status: Platinum Member (Offline)
Joined: Jul 26 2009
Posts: 592
Re: Mike in Tokyo Rogers

MarkM wrote:

I am still trying yo figure how a wind from the Northeast at Fukushima will blow something out over the Pacific.

I think he meant southeast, but whatever, it should wind up in Nigata instead of Tokyo. So, all those people living in Nigata looking for a reason to ditch their shovels, now have an addition reason to leave Laughing

Samuel

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or Register to post comments